The Uncertain O's Fan
by Stacey on Feb 2, 2010 10:56 PM EST
in Commentary & Analysis
71 comments
The Orioles and their fans find themselves in a different position this off season. They've reached a place where national writers are giving them some attention, saying they're well on their way to contention. Experts are placing a number of the team's young prospects in the top 50 or 100 of all baseball and raving about the younger players already on the team.
As an Oriole fan who has suffered through these dark times it's hard to know what to do with that information. On one hand I'm excited about the potential of the team. The talent we've seen brought to this club in the past few years and the glimpses of the future we got in 2009 were exciting even in the midst of another terrible season. But I just can't get too excited. I can't be too optimistic. We've been let down so many times over the years that hope is tough to come by. It's easier be a cynic. It's easier to assume it'll be another terrible season (and another one after that). If I actually let myself believe that the Orioles have the talent to compete and I actually put my faith in Andy MacPhail 100%, what happens when they fall apart again? I don't know that I can go through it.
Until the Orioles actually win again I'm not going to be able to actually believe it's ever going to happen, and I'm sure a lot of Orioles fans can relate. I go through this internal struggle when I start to feel too happy about the direction the team is taking or a player who's doing well. I think something good, then I think something bad to temper any enthusiasm.
For the upcoming season, those thoughts are generally something like what you'll find below the jump
Optimist: He's Matt freaking Wieters. He's one of the most talented players in the game and we all know he's going to put up monster numbers. He improved significantly over the last portion of 2009, hitting .333/.395/.486 over the final month and showing marked improvement throwing out runners.
Pessimist: It'd be just like the Orioles to draft a guy with such huge upside and then have him not pan out.
Optimist: Andy MacPhail has said repeatedly that he saw something in Atkins that makes him believe he can regain his form at the plate. He's still relatively young and put up great numbers just a few years ago. If it works out, great. If not, it's just a one year contract that will be easy to let go of if Brandon Snyder tears up AAA.
Pessimist: What to the Orioles have to do to get a decent first baseman up in this piece? I mean, honestly. First base is like, the easiest position. They let girls play first base on co-ed softball teams. But the Orioles just keep putting these crappy guys out there. Garrett Atkins is cooked. Look at his numbers, and that's WITH the Coors Field advantage.
Optimist: B-Rob hits a million doubles and can steal bases at will. We know what we're going to get from him and it's nice to have a position we just don't have to worry about.
Pessimist: Brian will be 32 years old in 2010 and has lost a step over the past few years. His speed won't last forever and beyond that, he's a lollygagger. Now that his buddy Miggi is back Brian will probably step up his loafing to a whole new level.
Optimist: Izturis was the best defensive SS in the American League last year and having a glove like his up the middle will be a tremendous asset to the young pitching staff. If the rest of the offense meets its potential then his bat won't be too much of a liability.
Pessimist: Izturis' OBP in 2009 was .294. That's unbelievabely ridiculous. That's only one point higer than Nick Markakis' 2009 batting average. Yeah he's good with the glove but how can the Orioles ever hope to compete in the AL East with a SS who walks less than 20 times in a year?
Optimist: Of the FA options for 3B this year, Miggi might actually make the most sense for the Orioles. Josh Bell shows promise in AAA and signing Figgins or Beltre would have just blocked him. Miggi's led the NL in doubles in 2009 and was 2nd in hits with 199. His bat will definitely improve the lineup and he'll be gone after just a year. Plus the guys sound excited to have him back.
Pessimist: Did everyone forget why the Orioles traded Tejada in the first place? Reports from the clubhouse were that he was a negative influence, some even called him a cancer. He sulked when the team was losing, which they'll do plenty of in 2010. Do we really want him around the young guys? Steroids, indictment, lying about his age, when does it stop?
Nick Markakis
Optimist: Nick is going into his 5th big league season and he'll be just 26 years old. He provides great defense in RF and has potential to be a real star. His numbers dipped a bit in 2009 but given his track record there is no reason to think that'll continue.
Pessimist: If Nick Markakis continues to play in the future the way he did in 2009 the Orioles are screwed. His walks dropped in half, taking his OBP and SLG with them. After three years of increasing production Nick looked just horrible at the plate for long stretches last year. What if this is Nick's future? How will the Orioles compete then?
Optimist: AJ spent the first part of the 2009 season giving us all a glimpse of the future. He really turned on the power and looked great. Yeah he struggled in the second half but he was dealing with injuries and possibly putting a lot of pressure on himself as the team slumped around him. He's still just 23 years old and is learning on the job. His gained experince combined with a healthy 2010 could help him really break out.
Pessimist: Is Adam Jones ever going to play a whole season without getting hurt? And would it kill him to stop swinging at those balls in the dirt? We hear about Jones' tools and see them on occasion, but it's possible he'll never put it together.
Optimist: Nolan Reimold finally got his chance and he took advantage of it in 2009. He led all rookies in HR and impressed us all with his patient batting eye, leading the team in OBP. Over a full season it's likely that Reimold can hit at least 25 home runs, and it'll be exciting to see what he can do now that he'll be playing healthy.
Pessimist: Plenty of guys have had one good year and don't pan out. He's no great shakes in the outfield and the best team is really in the field with Felix Pie out there, not Reimold. After years of "promising" outfielders like Luis Matos and Larry Bigbie, can we really expect that Markakis, Jones, AND Reimold will actually pan out?
Optimist: Luke led the O's in home runs and slugging percentage last year. Yes he was really streaky last year but 2009 was much more extreme than the rest of his career. He provides legitimate power to the lineup and it wouldn't surprise me at all if he hit over 30 home runs.
Pessimist: The 2nd half of last year was miserable. Scott was a black hole in the lineup after the all star break and I might actually go insane if I have to sit through that again.
Optimist: Millwood has a track record of pitching late into the game and his presence will help save a bullpen that gets completely burnt out every season. Having an older established guy in the rotation will take the pressure off of the young guys and while he won't win any awards, Millwood is a huge upgrade over Alredo Simon and Adam Eaton.
Pessimist: Millwood isn't good. His numbers looked good last year but a great deal of it appears to be the result of smoke and mirrors. He won't make that much of a difference and he's costing the Orioles $9 million. In the event that Jake Arrieta is pitching really well in AAA he'll probably have to remain in the minors because there's no way Millwood will get bumped from the rotation as long as he's healthy.
Optimist: Guthrie put together two solid seasons in 2007 and 2008. He's a smart guy and very athletic and possibly got messed up by the inconsistency of the World Baseball Classic. It's likely Guthrie will bounce back and be productive in 2010.
Pessimist: Guthrie looked like garbage last year and his peripheral stats were never anything to write home about. We were lucky to get what we did out of him but no doubt the Orioles will stick with him way too long.
Optimist: Bergesen was the O's best pitcher in 2009 and it was refreshing to see a pitcher who doesn't walk everyone in sight. As long as Bergy can keep the ball down and stay in the strike zone he can stick in the rotation a long time.
Pessimist: He can't keep it up. His K rate is too low and his contact rate is too high. He suffered a scary injury last season that he might not be completely over mentally.
Optimist: Matusz's minor league numbers were absolutely ridiculous and his last four starts of the season were tremendous. He has a 4 very good pitches and is ranked as one of the top prospects in baseball by every outlet in the business.
Pessimist: Pitching prospects bust all the time, especially when they are Orioles prospects. What's to keep Matusz from joining Matt Riley and Hayden Penn in the failed prospect graveyard?
Optimist: He held his own in the majors at the age of 21 and had flashes of brilliance. He's dominated at every level of the minors and is only going to get better.
Pessimist: He gave up a ton of HR in the majors last year and left the ball out over the plate more times than I could count. You have to figure some of these prospects are going to bust and Tillman could be the one.
I really, really hope the pessimist will take a back seat for most of this season, but I'm not holding my breath.
0 recs |
71 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Geez
Did you put a lot of thought in the pessimistic posts, or did it come naturally. I don’t blame you at all. I’m 19 and I started watching in the end of 2004. Also, I can really tell you don’t like Garret Atkins (recent posts help too haha). I’m sure it’ll be fine. He hit more of his, yes I know, 9 home runs away from Coors and when he was awesome his splits were just about the same. I wouldn’t say he’s cooked but, he’s close to it. Anyways, I really enjoyed the post!
by LoveForTheGame13 on Feb 2, 2010 11:16 PM EST reply actions
Faith
I have faith in MacPhail. He is doing everything he can to give us the best chance. It is NOT HIS RESPONSIBILITY to win games (although he did say start to rate him on the win-loss numbers). I have agreed with almost all of the moves made, and I only say almost mainly because of some of the moves we havent made, as opposed to the ones we have made.
It is the team that has to win the game, including ‘What the hell is a sacrifice bunt’ Trembley. If half of those pan out this year I would be plenty happy. That would atleast make for a more competative team….I dont know about you all, but I read all the optomistic points and could only get thru about 3 pessimistic ones. I’m trying to hope for the best…I’m trying.
"On my tombstone just write, 'The sorest loser that ever lived.'"
Earl Weaver
Even if it busts
I will be crushed, but at least I will be able to relax knowing we tried building a team the right way but it just wasn’t in the stars. That being said, at least some of these young guys have to be good, cause AM assembled a bunch of them
"I have seen the future and his name is Matt Wieters." Keith Law
by Reddrummer9187 on Feb 3, 2010 12:44 AM EST via mobile reply actions
The Orioles, individually and collectively, are like life: win some, lose some. And sometimes you get rained out. Or sign Sid. Twice.
Anyway, I like to think 82 is not such a ridiculous number this year. But then, as I frequently explain to people here, I’m an American: we’re optimists, that’s what we do. I mean, look where the country is:
Optimist: No longer run by a de facto chief executive whose principal henchman was a convicted felon and who himself committed multiple acts of malfeasance he remains liable for under international statutes and treaties to which the United States is a signatory (and joined in some of them by a de jure president who could not pronounce common words of three syllables, e.g. ‘nucular’), the country somehow managed to avoid the immediate economic consequences of the single most incompetent administration in 80 years — a complete financial collapse on the scale of 1929-32 — and gradually began to right itself as a member of the international community and as a common-sense steward of its own wealth despite determined rear-guard obstruction by oppositionists evidently incapable either of offering constructive alternatives or explaining why not, or indeed of conducting themselves in a civil manner in public.
Pessimist: Basically, we are owned by the Chinese.
And I still think we’ll have a good year— I mean us and the Orioles.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
Thx! The Optimist part was sort of a contest to see if it was possible to make a fair summary of the last 9 yrs in a single sentence. If Faulkner weren’t dead he prolly would’ve kicked the sh*t out of my version (that guy could write you a long sentence), but I was still pretty happy with how mine came out. Now I’m gunning for the All-England Summarise Proust Competition.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
Spoken like a true-blue American optimist!
What would that look like with a quart of wodka, I wonder?
So tell me in another run on sentence what you think of his replacement?
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I really haven't.
Was just asking a question. Which is not quite the same thing as chiming in with an opinion.
I’ve pretty much not ventured opinions on our President. He wasn’t the candidate I voted for, but he’s my President. That he has managed to get a record low public opinion rating before his first year in office was up is an indictment on both the poor state of our nation’s media industry and the American public. Just how in the hell can you rate any President’s performance in just one year? The guy would have to do something historically good or bad for that. I’m of the opinion that you really can’t rate a President’s performance until several years, if not decades, after he’s out of office.
I’m also tired of the constant bashing, from either side of the spectrum. It was down right disgusting on some of the things said about our last President. But even so, that doesn’t make taking cheap shots at the other party’s guy acceptable. I feel many on the right should be ashamed of themselfs. For me, it’s a simple matter of not wanting to be a hypocrite nor acting like some smug elitest.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Definitely agree with you on the opinion rating
He’s also not that far off in terms of opinion rating from where Reagan was (not going to get into my thoughts about how disastrous a presidency that was), but the media is acting like it’s unheard of. You’re definitely right that he hasn’t really done anything yet on which to be judged. I personally would have liked to see him handle things differently so far, but what can you do.
I think constructive bashing when bashing is deserved is fine. People shouldn’t be making personal insults, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to call out Bush for the awful mistakes he made and to criticize Obama for legitimate mistakes anybody thinks he’s making (there clearly are some to choose from). Just make sure the complaints are based in fact – that’s the thing that’s happening a lot right now that drives me crazy.
Good thing on you not going into Reagan's "disasterous" presidency.
You don’t want to be bashing one of the greatest Presidents ever.
Besides, what could you possibly know about Reagan other than what you might have learned in a class? You aren’t old to remember him as President.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I can't say he's one of my all time favorites ...
… as an actor, but as President – the man ranks up there with Cal Jr in the pantheon of American heroes.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Let's just say that's not a unanimous opinion. :)
I think he’s one of the worst in the post-WWII era, personally, and only W. is keeping him from last.
"The moment you stop thinking you're the best, it's time for you to get out the game." -'King' Mo Lawal
by duck on Feb 4, 2010 2:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I suspected there might be one or two peole who held an opinion on this ...
… slightly different than mine.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I would say that
Reagan is possibly the most over-rated and misunderstood president ever.
I didn’t realize being of voting age during a presidents’ term was required to form an opinion of his presidency. I guess nobody can ever say another word about anybody before FDR!
One doesn't have to be of voting age.
I was curious about the basis you formed your opinion from. Looking back at how I phrased it, I see I could have done a better job.
Regarding the opinions of people working in government – not to say they don’t have valid viewpoints, but would one expect anything different about a President who believed strongly in limiting government. If the current President were to dedicate himself to limiting the job opportunities of Oriole fans between the ages of 22 and 29, I’m betting it would impact your opinion of him.
Believe it or not, there are valid reasons for people to support limiting the growth of government and / or taxes. Here is just one small example – I was a volunteer reading tutor for several years under a federal program called Chapter One. Among the reasons I volunteered my time was that I believe strongly in the importance of reading and the benefit to be gained from getting kids to improve their skills and increase their interest in it. Another had to do with the inefficiency of supporting such efforts through federal tax dollars. I know that my community is far better served by my providing either my time or my money directly to my community than it is from having the federal government take my money and then turn around and send it back to my community. A very large portion of that money goes to support all the people in the federal government that have to “touch” it before it gets to Washington and then makes its way back here. And most of what does make it back goes to support the administrator whose primary function is to make sure all of the federal reporting paperwork is kept in order.
Now I understand this is but one very small example and also that there are probably as many people in this country who really believe that government exists solely to help us as there are who believe like I do that the “intent” to help is not the same as actually helping.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Limiting government is one thing – impeding the ability of goernment agencies to do essential jobs is another. People even in defense agencies (state in particular) talk regularly about the damage that Reagan did to their ability to do their jobs internationally.
I think small government vs. big government is a worthy discussion to have and surely there is waste (and much much worse) like what you describe above, but despite that you can’t just cut government services/functions when there isn’t a private sector alternative set up to take their place. And when you do make cuts you really need to understand the impact of those cuts before making them and that’s a serious criticism that many public policy experts and historians have of the Reagan administration – that it was cut first and figure the rest out later.
You're kidding, right?
Not to get al political, but check a numerical trend from 1981-1989 for me: Size of the national debt during terms of office.
(Here’s a hint – it started as 33% current gross federal debt as a percentage of GDP when he started, and has over 50% when he left office)
By tenure, the largest increases in gross debt relative to GDP, to date, occurred under George H.W. Bush (11.2%), George W. Bush (11.9%), and Ronald Reagan (+18.5%).
Now tell me what a “great” president he was.
"The moment you stop thinking you're the best, it's time for you to get out the game." -'King' Mo Lawal
Yeah I was going to get into economics
but got distracted.
Duck you might enjoy that book I recommended too if you haven’t already read it. Very good read.
What if we carry this line of argument out another 4 years?
It looks like it will increase even more under the Obama administration.
I don’t think you can lay all of this at the feet of the President. It is Congress that authorizes spending and passes legislation. And then you have to consider how much of any annual budget is discrestionary.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Well, first off it's one of those glib remarks that implies ...
… it’s the ultimate answer without actually proving anything or even having to be true.
Secondly, even if I was to concede the point that our nation is an absolute wreck, which I don’t in even the tiniest degree, you still would have to show that it’s all caused by his predecessor (sp?) and that spending even more money is going to fix things. When the initial point of discussion was the growth in debt (as a percentage of GDP), that last is going to be very difficult. Like you going to the bank and telling them you are going to spend your way out of bankruptcy, using their money of course.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Sure
there are legitimate debates about whether Bush was personally responsible for the unnecessary war and the financial meltdown, but I thought the initial discussion was about how awful Bush was and then you asked for a one sentence description of Obama and then we talked about public opinion of various presidents and how valid it is? Where was debt raised as the central topic?
And also
isn’t there pretty much unanimous agreement among economists that government spending IS actually the way out of a recession?? Most economists that I’ve read (although admittedly they appear in liberal elitist publications like the NYT and The Economist) actually argued that the stimulus should have been much bigger and that cutting or freezing government expenditures now (or even next year before we see whether we’re fully out of this – which seems unlikely) would be foolish.
Really, to use your analogy at the end of your post, it would be like going to the bank and telling them you’re going to spend your way out of bankruptcy by borrowing money to start a business that will generate enough revenue to get you back on your feet.
I wasn't thinking about stimulus spending.
And while I applaud the President on his proposal to freeze government spending for the next three years, I also recognize it as basically window dressing. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it or that it counts for nothing, but it’s sort of like bailing on the Titanic with a hand held bucket.
If you are going to talk about government spending, it’s
Social Security
Medicare
Interest on the debt
Defense spending
What are you going to cut? Find me a member of Congress with the guts to take on Medicare or SS. Even if you wanted to, you can’t stop payment on what the government has borrowed. So I guess that leaves Defense spending. No brainer. We just stop spending money on all these “unnecessary” wars.
Oh, wait. Obama hasn’t exactly done that, has he. In fact one would be hard pressed to point out where his administration has made major changes from the previous one in their approach to Iraq or Afghanistan. (One of the reasons I suspect his ratings are so low. All the people who consider Bush as a war mongering retard are upset that Obama hasn’t brought peace and love to the world.)
Like almost every President before him Obama is stuck with what all the previous Congresses have enacted. He’s unlikely going to be able to make significant cuts in any of the sectors mentioned above and if the Health Care bill passes as is, hundreds of billions more will be spent by the government. That’s what I was referring to. The Stimulus bill is pocket change compared to overall government spending.
I would like to leave you with one thought, sparked by the unnecessary war comment. I believe it was George Orwell who said, People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." We are able to have these conversations and then go home to our familires and friends because there are men and women in places like Afghanistan serving on our behalf. It is easy to sit safely at home and talk about how a war is unnecessary. But as the people who are called upon to fight them know, it often is not the case.
Have a good weekend, I’m off for a few drinks to celebrate my birthday.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." We are able to have these conversations and then go home to our familires and friends because there are men and women in places like Afghanistan serving on our behalf. It is easy to sit safely at home and talk about how a war is unnecessary. But as the people who are called upon to fight them know, it often is not the case.
It’s exactly because of these people that most of us are so offended by the unnecessary war in Iraq that cost so many of their lives because of the will of a few power and money hungry men. I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about Iraq and not Afghanistan. Afghanistan was clearly a necessary war, though I think the previous administration could have done a much better job with planning, execution, and dedication (not getting distracted by a totally unnecessary war would have helped).
I’m not sure what your overall point about government spending was. That government spending is massive and complex and mostly pertains to things that are politically untouchable?
I’m sure there are folks out there who wanted Obama to get us out of Iraq immediately, but I think that’s a pretty unrealistic expectation and he campaigned on a promise to do it responsibly the entire time which he still seems to be shooting for. So I’m ok on that front. Once we’ve created a clusterfuck for no reason, it’s not right to just leave civilians to be the perpetual victims of it.
Enjoy your birthday – I’ll be snowbound with beer and whiskey and 3 dogs…
This seemed pretty relevant from today’s NYT:
Contrary to what you often hear, the large deficit the federal government is running right now isn’t the result of runaway spending growth. Instead, well more than half of the deficit was caused by the ongoing economic crisis, which has led to a plunge in tax receipts, required federal bailouts of financial institutions, and been met — appropriately — with temporary measures to stimulate growth and support employment.
and
But there’s no reason to panic about budget prospects for the next few years, or even for the next decade. Consider, for example, what the latest budget proposal from the Obama administration says about interest payments on federal debt; according to the projections, a decade from now they’ll have risen to 3.5 percent of G.D.P. How scary is that? It’s about the same as interest costs under the first President Bush.
You talked in another thread about how we are often bombarded with talk about “crises” that aren’t really crises. I tend to think all this sudden concern about the deficit falls into that category.
I stopped taking a hard line on deficit spending a long time ago.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Forget economics
The man funded jihadists who went on to kill 3000 Americans on US soil.
And no, fighting communists (who were only a threat to THIS country in his deranged imagination) is not a legitimate reason.
You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever.
I'll believe it when I see it
I love the O’s, watching games on tv or from the stands, but after 2005, something died inside of me. That season – that monumental, humiliating collapse – killed any hopes and dreams of the Orioles every reaching the postseason during my lifetimes. I’m a zombie fan now: always on board no matter what, excited for the season to begin and sad to see it end. But I’m not putting money aside for postseason tickets.
How old are you?
I have thoughts of them not reaching the playoffs again too, but it just seems to ridiculous to actually consider (I’m 27).
I turned 27 this past November
I was in middle school the last time the Orioles went to the playoffs, and I wasn’t yet the hardcore fan that I am today. Basically, my entire fandom has existed amidst losing season after losing season.
How many wins
What did the O’s win last year – 64 games! They have to win 75 this year or the pessimist wins.
It's near impossible
to really be an optimist given the economics behind this game. The lack of a real salary cap is killing baseball, making it a game that appeals to a smaller and smaller number of markets. This is certainly not news. But it does continue to get worse. Until this is finally and seriously addressed, the chances of an O’s resurgence are always going to be severely restricted.
by Jonny Pops on Feb 3, 2010 9:14 AM EST via mobile reply actions
It's not even that
Because I’m not necessarily talking about the team going to the playoffs. I mean that’s the ultimate goal of course, but I’m thinking even along the lines of a talented team that’s fun to watch, wins more than it loses, and makes things interesting.
I will lead these Peoples to the promised land, also known as "Slightly Ahead of the Blue Jays." ~WietersRunDry
I'm an Optimist
It is pre-season springtime and the Orioles are in first place. I know, I know, we’re also in last place, but like I said. I’m an optimist. I like the direction the Orioles are taking and I support McPhail’s strategy. I even liked this winter’s moves. We needed a closer and he got one. We needed a veteran starter and he did that, but not long term…. so Arrieta and Britton aren’t blocked. The first baseman is a reclamation project with lots of upside. If he can find his groove again, he is young enough to play here for years or we can trade him. If he doesn’t, by the time we know that, Snyder may be ready. Tejada for 3B is fine. He will hit pretty well, although not with power, and Bell has time to refine his hitting against lefties in Norfolk. We will see Bell in September. No problem.
I’m looking for a competitive team this year. Play the AL East on even terms and beat up on the west and central. I think the Orioles will surprise this year. I hope for a winning season with 80 to 85 wins.
Welcome to day 2 of Live from Siberia
The heat in our bldg (and much of the district, apparently) went out yesterday evening after an unfortunate smelting accident — no wait, that’s Goldmember — I mean after a fire at a relay station or some damn thing. It came back on during the night, praise be.
But it went out again two hrs. ago…and while I’m optimistic by nature and nationality [see above], it’s entirely possible that this will not be a pleasant evening in our ’hood here in the Big Onion.
Good thing we’re having a heat wave (-2’ C today) and the gas and electric are functioning. All told we’re not in bad shape, considering this is a country where every time you turn the light switch to ON and the room suddenly fills with light, some part of you involuntarily goes ALL RIGHT…
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
I read an interesting story the other day
about the stray dogs (and particularly the stray dogs that live in the subway stations and ride the trains) in Moscow. Made me think of you.
here's the article if you're interested and haven't already seen it
not sure how many people read FT
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/628a8500-ff1c-11de-a677-00144feab49a.html
I’ve seen ‘em. It’s amazing: they actually do know the stops. And they never pay, the deadbeats! They’re riding on my ruble!
But I’m still waiting to see two of them stop in front the Metro map on the wall and get into an arf-arf debate about the quickest route from Park Kultury to Barrikadnaya during rush-hour. If I spoke dog (which Tim thinks I do!), I’d give them some tips on shortening the cross-town routes.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
Can I help it if you've given the impression ....
… of being multilingual?
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Which is perfectly legal here among consenting adults!
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
One of those embarassiing things about being an American.
I took three years of German in HS and at best remember s few words. As an undergrad studying Latin American history, I thought learning Spanish would be useful should I ever want to do primary research. After studying more than 3 hours for the first quiz (quiz, not exam) and getting a D+, I decided I could probably get by with hiring a cute translator. (I never studied three hours for exams, including finals and was a Deans List student. Couldn’t see the point in busting my ass in the small hope of eeking out a C.)
I always thought I had no aptitude for languages. Many years later I took a test for the Army to gauge one’s ability for learning languages (a requirement as a Psychological Warfare specialist) and was told I scored one of the highest results they had ever seen. Don’t know what to make of that. Since I still only speak English (being able to say I love you to my wife in Korean doesn’t quite count as speaking a foreign language) I’m sticking to the belief that I suck at learning them.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Its because teaching languages in high school is a terrible way of teaching other languages
Language development occurs almost entirely early in life. By high school, that part of your brain is pretty well wired and you have to really work to pick up a second language. If being multilngual is really a priority, it needs to be taught at a much younger grade (plus i would love to see Fox News explode at the suggestion of teaching elementary school kids Spanish).
No argument as to the chronology of hard-wiring: by the mid-teens, those areas of the brain that make it easy for children to “absorb” second languages (and more) are already shutting down, for reasons we can’t yet explain physiologically — although we can literally see it happen now thx to the advances in imaging over the last 20 yrs: you can actually observe the centers that process languages (and certain musical assimilation abilities!) gradually working less well, alas, and no one knows how to deter or reverse it.
But all is not lost for h.s. kids: they are still far better at letting the FL algorithms “seep” into their brainpans than mature adults, as I’ve seen myself in my own h.s. students. When the first US-USSR school exchanges came on line in the late 80’s, I watched our kids, during a month of living w/ Russian-speaking families here, simply come out with stuff that amazed me, things that nobody “taught” them in the conventional classroom sense, of course.
As their teacher, I remember it felt like being a football coach— a guy who had for years watched his ball carriers hit the line and struggle forward for 2-3 yards, as a matter of course. And then suddenly, the same players start hitting the line and bam, they’re through, they’re in the open field, just running. You have no idea where they’re going, and you don’t care— all you can do, like any coach on the sidelines, is shout along with everybody else: Go, go, go!
I recall the first meeting of the Soviet and American h.s. exchangees pretty well: I and my Soviet English-teaching counterparts were more than a little nervous about how our kids would get on; hey, it was still Cold war I outside, OK, and we didn’t even know if the two groups would be able to understand each other literally. It took about 15 min. for the Russian English teachers and the American Russian teacher to start feeling utterly superfluous.
And it felt good.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
p.s.
And in a larger sense, of course, it’s never to late for FL fun…if you really wanna have some! I started Russian as a jr. in college— quit after two semesters ’cause it was just “too hard”— and then took it up again after college, this time determined to learn it. And the rest, as they say, is social science. Er, history. Damn, I always get those mixed up.
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
You’re right about Americans, taken en masse, coping w/ foreign languages — or rather not coping. Let’s face it: collectively we suck.
But this is largely b/c (a) we haven’t had to cope with them for most of our history; and (b) our FL teaching has never been distinguished. Good evidence for (b) emerges in your example: if an average student studies 3 hrs for a quiz and achieves a D+, he is either studying the wrong things or the right things the wrong way— which in either case should be easy enough for any competent teacher to correct. You were obviously a better than average student (as the Army testing later showed), so your Spanish teacher was most likely (alas) just one more less-than-competent American FL instructor.
Don’t sell yourself short! Try another FL— they rock!
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
Implying that Titov is a stray dog?
Or just a bitch?
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Whoa, budda-bing!
I resemble that remark!
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
This is kind of how I look at marriage
and I feel your pain, fearless leader.
BTW, am I the only one who’s balls are getting busted with the Brian=lollygagging thing, or are there other irredeemable sinners in CC-land? (Irredeemable sinner—another concept borrowed from marriage world.)
I believe the word you want is unredeemable.
irredeemable refers to not being able to by back or pay off something.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I feel your pain
Personally, I think they are maybe a year away. Another O’s fan I know here in LA is convinced they are going to break through this year. But encouraging thing is, for a long time they were a bad veteran team. Last year they were a bad young team, which is a lot better.
And, off topic — Geaux Saints!!!
"Killing a Yankee fan -- is that illegal in this state?" -- Homicide Life on the Street
Great Writeup
I agree – it’s hard not to get sucked into the pre-spring giddiness in the press. I get suckered into a lot of it every year. Al lthe same, based on your write-up:
Wieters: Optimist
Atkins: Optimist
Roberts: Optimist
Izzy: Pessimist (answer to bonus question about winning in the AL East with an SS who walks less than 20 times: NO.)
Tejada: Pessimist
Markakis: on the fence
Jones: On the fence – leaning to Pessimist
Reimold: Way, way Optimist
Scott: Pessimist
Millwood: Who knows?
Guthrie: Pessimist
Bergy: Optimist
Matuz: Optimist
Tillman: Pessimist
I'll be optomistic about the O's when I see something real.
The short version is that if we don’t get good to very good pitching, then forget about it.
Bergesen needs to show last season was no fluke – I’m somewhat optimistic on this one.
Guthrie needs to show that last year was just an off year. He doesn’t have to pitch like a #1 or 2, but be at least considered in the top half of the #3’s out there. – I’m a shade above neutral on this one.
We really need Matuz to put up mostly a #1 level performance. – I’m fairly optomistic on this one.
I have to be pessimistic about any of the other young potential starters – Tillman, Arrieta, etc, if only because it is unlikely that Baltimore turns out 3 or 4 stud pitchers at once.
Millwood – No idea. If he gives innings and goes .500, it might be enough.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Arf arf Bergesen arf arf arf, arfing arf!
Guthrie bark bark, barkety-bark barking bark— bark bark?
Bow-wow bow-wow: Millwood bow-wowiest bowing bow-wow!!!
"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." Churchill,1942-- a rebuilding year.
What ever way the wind blows!!!
The O’s scored 741 runs last year, that was tolally respectiable ( at least I think so) they ranked 16th the majors or middle of the pack. Because of the changes and gaining knowledge of some of the younger players, I really believe they could score a additional 100 runs. Third base, left field and catcher postions should more productive than last year. Huff didn’t exactly have his best year at first last year either so Atkins doesn’t have to hit 40 home runs to maintain the pace. There will be injuries, but the O’s have more depth than they had in the the last few years. If they do score a 100 more this year than that would be 841 and only the Yankees, Angels, Red Sox and Phillies scored more than that last year.
The pitching . . . well that is a totally different story. They had the worst ERA of either league! If you look at some of the best pitchers in the game, most were not very overwhelming their first year or two. Most of the ones that were turned out to be just a flash in the pan. If the young arms live up to their potenial than they will look like the O’s of old. Don’t worry about the bats, the runs will be there. The pitching will be a roll of the dice.
i feel the pain stacy
been an o’s fan since i was 10, im 28 now, so i know the disappointment, but for some sick way im feelin the black and orange flowin through my blood again like every year, mcphail is doin a good job, if we dont compete this year, we can flip tejada or millwood for even more prospects, counting on prospects is a tough pill to swallow, but in a division with the red sox and yanks, thats how the o’s have to roll, im pretty happy with this years moves and yes probably not competing in the al east, it provides options for the o’s, gotta believe, after all these years, one thing i have learned, the longer your team struggles and you are disappointed, the sweeter a world series ring is, think about it, the yankeees are supposed to win every year, how sweet is the ring? a team like the o’s, that would make me view life as a whole differently, just because ive been committed so long, have faith, i love the o’s and always will
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
SBNation.com Recent Stories
GAMETHREAD SPONSOR
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
